David Wu

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Madam Speaker, yesterday, at 2:28 p.m. local time, a massive earthquake measuring 7.9 on the Richter scale struck Sichuan Province in southwest China. Tragically, the death toll is now estimated in excess of 12,000 people, and it may rise. There are thousands of people injured and thousands more remain trapped beneath rubble. Especially tragic are the hundreds, and, perhaps over 1,000, school children who are trapped beneath their collapsed schools. I ask my colleagues to join me in observing a moment of silence to express our deep sympathy for those affected by yesterday's earthquake in China.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, last year 1.5 million American households entered foreclosure, and this year the number of American families in danger of losing their homes could be as high as 2 million. These foreclosures could reduce overall economic activity by $166 billion this year as the effects of the mortgage crisis spill over into other sectors of the economy. In my State of Oregon, the foreclosure rate among subprime borrowers increased by 28 percent in the fourth quarter of 2007. Over 5,000 Oregon families are currently in foreclosure, more than half of whom hold subprime mortgages. But this debate is not about facts and statistics. If it were, it would be over by now. By requiring that the holders of debt take a haircut down to 85 percent of current market value, we are sharing the pain. By requiring that people who are working in order to be eligible for this program are paying at least 35 percent of their income in order to be eligible, we are exercising responsibility. What this debate is really about is a matter of values. The values being expounded on the other side of this debate are absolutely astounding, and nothing illustrates it better than a movie I love, ``It's a Wonderful Life.'' George Bailey was the hero of that movie, and he was dealing with a hard-hearted old man named Mr. Potter. Mr. Potter said to George Bailey as he was trying to save American households, ``Have you put any real pressure on these people to pay their mortgages?'' And George Bailey relied, ``Times are bad, Mr. Potter. A lot of these people are out of work.'' ``Then foreclose.'' George Bailey answers, ``I can't do that. These families have children.'' ``Not my children,'' said Mr. Potter. Well, what we hear from the other side is: not my children, these folks are irresponsible, throw them out. We clearly have the upper hand in this debate.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, the housing crisis has devastated millions of American families who have lost their homes, but the crisis doesn't end there. Experts predict that housing foreclosures could reduce overall economic activity by over $160 billion this year thanks to sharp declines in real estate, the construction industry, and in consumer spending. The slump in the real estate market is hurting manufacturers, construction firms and other businesses that have been forced to lay off thousands of workers. Ending the foreclosure crisis is vital to the American economy, our economic recovery, and to Americans who are hurting. And that is why it is so important that this Congress pass the bipartisan housing package that we are presenting this week. It reported out of the Financial Services Committee by both Republicans and Democrats and sent to this floor for our consideration. Mr. Speaker, serious problems with subprime mortgages have pushed the housing market into its worst slump in decades, weakening the economy and making American families less secure. The package of bills we are presenting today will help stabilize the housing industry and give the American economy the boost it so sorely needs. And I urge every Member of the House to support these much-needed bills.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 3513, the Copper Salmon Wilderness Act. This bill, introduced by my friend, colleague and Dean of the Oregon delegation, Mr. DeFazio, would set aside nearly 13,000 acres in the headwaters of the Elk River on the southern coast of Oregon, and designate more than 11 additional miles of the river as either wild or scenic under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Copper Salmon area contains one of the Nation's largest remaining stands of low-elevation old-growth forest and in the north fork of the Elk, one of the healthiest salmon, steelhead, and cutthroat trout runs in the continental United States. Mr. Speaker, I cannot talk about the health of this great river without calling attention to the fact that the Pacific Coast salmon fishermen face one of the largest salmon fishery closures ever recorded in the United States. It is legislation like this that makes us realize the importance of looking into the future and to move in a direction that not only protects the fish, but also the local economy by providing habitat for more fish to flourish and survive into adulthood. Mr. Speaker, it was poor natural resource management that has helped to create our recent salmon disasters and this bill offers a chance to head in another direction. The Oregon delegation and their friends in California and Washington have worked hard, and worked collectively to make sure that both salmon and our fishermen are protected. I would like to thank you, Mr. Speaker, for your assistance in the past for disaster relief funds for our 1,200 salmon fishermen. I ask that you keep a watchful eye this season as the salmon fishermen of the Pacific face another closed season, another disaster declaration, and lost revenue.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. If the chairwoman would yield for a moment, I would support the gentleman from Missouri's amendment.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I rise in support of H.R. 5819, this SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act. I want to commend Chairwoman Velazquez and the gentleman from Ohio for their fine work in the Small Business Committee to bring a strong bill to the floor. I also want to recognize Drs. Ehlers and Gingrey and Chairman Gordon of our Science and Technology Committee for their leadership on this issue. SBIR and STTR are integral to our innovation agenda. Small companies are where a lot of innovation happens, and we need to support these companies to remain successful in the competitive global economy. At more than $2.3 billion a year, SBIR and STTR comprise the largest single source of Federal funding for private sector technological innovation. These funds help fund companies to turn federally funded research into new jobs, products, and services. However, SBIR and STTR were created more than 20 years ago, and we need to restructure both programs to respond to the new global innovation environment. Last week, the Technology and Innovation Subcommittee marked up H.R. 5789, the Science and Technology Innovation Act of 2008, which also reauthorized SBIR and STTR. I am glad to see that many of the provisions from H.R. 5789 were included in the subject bill, H.R. 5819. I thank Chairwoman Velazquez for working to include provisions that the Science Committee thought were critical to the continued success of SBIR and STTR. Prior to coming to Congress, I practiced technology law for a number of years, and I helped a number of applicants through the SBIR application process. I can tell you that it is a long and arduous process and that frequently, grant sizes were not adequate. The bill we are considering today includes many updates which can fix some of the problems that I saw in the private sector, such as increasing the set- aside by one-half percent, increasing the award sizes, allowing for agency flexibility and granting awards, and addressing venture capital participation in the SBIR program. Again, I want to thank the chairwoman for introducing this good legislation which improves upon existing programs that are vital to the development of innovative technologies. I urge my colleagues to support this bill. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington, the chairman of the Research and Education Subcommittee of the Science Committee, Mr. Baird.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, at this time, I am pleased to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Ohio, a member of the committee, a leader in the field of nanotechnology, Mr. Wilson.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, we have one further speaker, who, we are told, is on her way.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, I am ready to close.

Mr. WU. This is a finely crafted bill, which a lot of Members have worked on for quite some time. I want to especially thank those staffers who normally do not get recognition: Dennis Worden of my personal staff, Barb Jones, a detailee from the National Institute of Standards and Technology; Mike Quear from the Science Committee staff; and also Piper Largent of the Republican side on the committee staff. I think that I would just close by saying that this is a good bill. It is a compromise bill. No one is getting everything that they want. But I think that on balance this is a bill which is good for innovation in America. Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. WU. Madam Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WU. It has been delightful to be working with the majority on the SBIR/STTR bill. The minority has chosen to make this into a debate about energy prices. A professor at Stanford University estimates that oil prices should be at about $60 a barrel. The chairman of Exxon, I understand, says that oil should be at about $55 a barrel. And I think the only reason why oil is at twice that price is because of an unnecessary war and a Republican Congress which permitted Exxon to speculate in the energy market.

Mr. WU. I thank the chairwoman. I would like to inquire of the proponent of the amendment to clarify that his amendment, the net effect is to permit two corporate owned venture capital firms each to own 10 percent of an applicant as opposed to what is currently in the bill of one corporate owned venture capital firm owning 10 percent of an applicant.

Mr. WU. Instead of grandstanding on gas issues, instead of taking ``yes'' for an answer, the minority would want to kill a bill that has funded NEI Corporation of Somerset, New Jersey that enables the development of batteries for hybrid vehicles; a program that funded Eltron Research for coal gasification that establishes energy independence; that funded Mohawk Innovative Technology of Albany, New York to enable the hydrogen economy. You want energy independence? Vote for this bill. Stop the political grandstanding.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Speaker, I don't know how we got on the subject of gasoline prices because we're here to talk about SBIR and STTR. But if we want to talk about the price of gasoline, I think that the reason why we have $4-a-gallon gasoline is because this administration got us into an unnecessary war in Iraq and that drove up the price of gasoline at least $2 a gallon. So if you want to talk about gasoline, let's talk about the war in Iraq. Now let's return to the subject of SBIR and STTR. The last time that we authorized either one of these problems, the SBIR program, was in the 106th Congress. The bill was marked up by the Small Business Committee and discharged by the Science Committee. I would note that the bill was not even referred to a subcommittee of the Science Committee. The bill then proceeded to the floor under a suspension of the rules. And we all know that as a suspension bill, there was absolutely no opportunity to offer an amendment to the underlying legislation. Again, the last time that we authorized STTR, which was in the 107th Congress, the bill was marked up by the full Small Business Committee and discharged by both the Subcommittee on Environment, Technology, and Standards and by the full Science Committee without any Science Committee markup. The bill then proceeded to the floor under a suspension of the rules, and again there was absolutely no opportunity to amend the bill. What do we have today? We have 17 amendments on the floor. We have 17 amendments made in order by the Rules Committee here on the floor. Who's running an open process?

Mr. WU. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. WU. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, with 17 amendments made in order under this structured rule, which I support, I think the gentleman and I will have plenty of time to share on the floor today.

Mr. WU. I would be happy to yield.

Mr. WU. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. WU. Seventeen amendments is obviously 17 times any one amendment to the SBIR bill. Now last time there were zero amendments; so it's infinitely better than what happened last time.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 29th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act and the 120th anniversary of the Twin Oaks estate in Washington, DC, a National Historic Site and the former residence of nine ambassadors from the Republic of China. The Twin Oaks estate, located on Woodley Road in Northwest Washington, DC, is considered the largest privately-owned estate in the District of Columbia. The land upon which Twin Oaks rests belonged originally to Uriah Forrest, an American general in the Revolutionary War, a member of the first Continental Congress, and one of Maryland's first delegates to Congress. In 1888, the property was sold to Mr. Gardiner Green Hubbard, founder and first president of the National Geographic Society. Mr. Hubbard commissioned one of America's leading architects at the time, Richard Allen, to design and construct a 26- room house in the early Colonial (Georgian) Revival style. Mr. Hubbard's son-in-law, telephone inventor Alexander Graham Bell, once lived at the estate. In 1937, the Twin Oaks estate was rented to the Government of the Republic of China, and in 1947 the property was formally sold to that Government. The estate remained in possession of the Republic of China Government after it moved to Taiwan at the end of the Chinese Civil War in 1949. From 1937 to 1978, the Twin Oaks estate was the official residence of nine Republic of China ambassadors, who used the estate for social gatherings and business meetings with senior members of the U.S. government and members of the diplomatic corps. In late 1978, President Jimmy Carter announced that the United States would shift diplomatic relations from the Republic of China to the People's Republic of China on January 1. 1979. Fearing that the People's Republic of China would claim ownership of all its assets in the United States, the Republic of China government in Taiwan asked Thomas G. Corcoran, Sr. to help arrange for the sale of the Twin Oaks estate to a private American civic organization, the Friends of Free China Association, co-chaired by Senator Barry Goldwater. However, the passage of the Taiwan Relations Act, signed into law on April 10, 1979, rendered the transaction unnecessary and ensured that Twin Oaks would remain under ownership of the Republic of China. Twin Oaks is an invaluable symbol of friendship between the peoples of the United States and Taiwan. Today let us honor the 120th anniversary of the Twin Oaks estate and the 29th anniversary of the Taiwan Relations Act.

Mr. WU

Mr. WU. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Do I understand the gentleman's amendment is designed specifically to increase firefighter safety within the wildland-urban interface?

Mr. WU. I thank the gentleman. Do I further understand that the gentleman's amendment does not intend to expand the clearing of biomass beyond current force management practices outside of the wildland-urban interface?